A large proportion of businesses fail to adequately protect their networks from the potential threat posed by ex-employees. IT decision-makers surveyed as part of a study by OneLogin claim that over half (58%) of former employees can still access the corporate network. The study also found that nearly a quarter (24%) of UK businesses have experienced data breaches by ex-employees.

Nearly all (92%) respondents admitted to spending up to an hour on manually de-provisioning former employees from every corporate application. Half (50%) of respondents are not using automated de-provisioning technology to ensure an employee’s access to corporate applications stops the moment they leave the business. This de-provisioning burden may explain why over a quarter (28%) of ex-employees’ corporate accounts remain active for a month or more after they’ve departed a given business.

“The sheer level of data breaches revealed by our study, coupled with the revelation that many businesses are failing to put simple processes in place to promptly de-provision ex-employees, should raise serious alarm bells for company leaders,” said Alvaro Hoyos, CISO at OneLogin.

“Our study suggests that many businesses are burying their heads in the sand when it comes to this basic, but significant threat to valuable data, revenue and brand image. There should be no excuse for this negligence, which will be brought further into the spotlight when the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into effect in 2018. The GDPR makes data protection a legal requirement for organisations, which could face fines of up to €20 million or 4% of their annual turnover, depending on which of those figures is higher.”

Hoyos went on to state: “With this in mind, businesses should proactively seek to close any open doors that could provide rogue ex-employees with opportunities to access and exploit valuable corporate data. Tools such as automated de-provisioning and SIEM will help close those doors with ease and speed, while also enabling businesses to manage and monitor all use of corporate applications. The first step is acknowledging the problem, which businesses have now done by confessing that they’re aware of the issue. Next, they must take positive steps to fix this issue by using the available tools.”

One-in-three (32%) security professionals lack effective intelligence to detect and take action against cyber threats. That’s according to a new study from Anomali, which also reveals that almost a quarter (24%) believe they’re at least one year behind the average threat actor. Half of this sample admitted they’re trailing by two-to-five years. This confirms the belief that many organisations are not adequately mitigating cyber risks.

The survey also signals that organisations struggle to detect malicious activity at the earliest stage of a breach or to learn from past exposures, which leaves numerous vulnerabilities undiscovered. Almost one-in-five (17%) of respondents to the survey haven’t invested in any threat detection tools, paid or open threat feeds or User and Entity Behaviour Analytics.

The findings of this study also demonstrate the need for organisations to possess an effective business continuity programme. If security professionals are not able to detect or prevent cyber threats then the host company must have plans in place to deal with those that do sneak through to ensure they’re not disruptive to operations.

Successful cyber attacks are not ‘smash and grab’-type events. Rather, cyber criminals typically lurk undetected inside enterprises’ IT systems for 200 days or more before discovery. During this time, attackers gain access inside the network, escalate privileges, search for high value information and ultimately exfiltrate data or perform other malicious activities.

This so-called ‘200-day problem’ is an ever-present danger, but survey respondents rarely examine historical records to discover whether or not a threat actor has entered their system. Just 20% consult past system logs on a daily basis, 20% weekly and 14% monthly, while 22% said either ‘Never’ or they don’t even know how often. This results in multiple missed opportunities to help prevent a data breach.

“The ‘200-day problem’ arises from the fact that logs are produced in such massive quantities that, typically, only 30 days are retained and running searches over long time ranges is a process that can take hours or even days to complete,” explained Jamie Stone, vice-president (EMEA) at Anomali. “Detecting a compromise at the earliest stage possible can identify suspicious or malicious traffic before it’s allowed to penetrate the network or cause harm. It’s imperative to invest in technologies that security teams can use to centralise and automate threat detection, not just daily, but against historical data as well.”

About the Author

Brian Sims BA (Hons) Hon FSyI, Editor, Risk UK (Pro-Activ Publications)
Beginning his career in professional journalism at The Builder Group in March 1992, Brian was appointed Editor of Security Management Today in November 2000 having spent eight years in engineering journalism across two titles: Building Services Journal and Light & Lighting.
In 2005, Brian received the BSIA Chairman’s Award for Promoting The Security Industry and, a year later, the Skills for Security Special Award for an Outstanding Contribution to the Security Business Sector.
In 2008, Brian was The Security Institute’s nomination for the Association of Security Consultants’ highly prestigious Imbert Prize and, in 2013, was a nominated finalist for the Institute's George van Schalkwyk Award.
An Honorary Fellow of The Security Institute, Brian serves as a Judge for the BSIA’s Security Personnel of the Year Awards and the Securitas Good Customer Award.
Between 2008 and 2014, Brian pioneered the use of digital media across the security sector, including webinars and Audio Shows. Brian’s actively involved in 50-plus security groups on LinkedIn and hosts the popular Risk UK Twitter site.
Brian is a frequent speaker on the conference circuit. He has organised and chaired conference programmes for both IFSEC International and ASIS International and has been published in the national media.
Brian was appointed Editor of Risk UK at Pro-Activ Publications in July 2014.

Contact Sales:

Archive Search

All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Content on this website, including materials available for download, are supplied solely for the private use of visitors to this site, and must not be redistributed by third party sites, or as part of any marketing or promotional material, without permission in writing from the publisher.While every care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of material included in Risk UK (both the hardcopy publications and this website), the publishers cannot be held responsible for the accuracy of the information contained herein, or any consequence arising from it.